IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Webpush] Receipt subscription follow-up

Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> Tue, 26 April 2016 05:26 UTC

Return-Path: <costin@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: webpush@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: webpush@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C747412B039 for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 22:26:13 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.699
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.699 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YUVHc8_JJ5Ah for <webpush@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 22:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-ig0-x233.google.com (mail-ig0-x233.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4001:c05::233]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B8BA212B017 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 22:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-ig0-x233.google.com with SMTP id bi2so87117062igb.0 for <webpush@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 22:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=3UpJ52xtyyRKBMgHhuwjWxdqYq9iQ3UplIG7/Ttq3mE=; b=PIyn3a5HQ8OCmyBALLzb+P3zC7Pidkal1OBFihnEheWnLvPnKOxcaipYirIPBA1LVB SICgW3ir+1P9CLOtBGWnQGKsbv1mtY+vR/SLX9g5mdOAxuHGSo+NRZvpMMH9y9y1jp5l I+rbAUuZZ1BRaJUvZan6jUCQv99OVPpxj2UWK96fldj/4Y9SKuag2IWqIMGO77G0OTgH wz5/iJJ0ClWH9Tjtu09nSCrCVYUBFYU0BmzgC6wni/E1gSpiJgbLjb47a5XqqX6xdc+g SV2zA3ErPaTYrRGbaWx56FioFLq8VVAmkyFFJX9N9h1/yUiwGocIzoRyDhggkzKPQ0HH XfPQ==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=3UpJ52xtyyRKBMgHhuwjWxdqYq9iQ3UplIG7/Ttq3mE=; b=hTyi+lVKrT6CLnfW4V2TkocfYDR4ArXoozOCLI7rW4k5sM6sWpQFypnkq6sSkBESqT jalIZhFNLoSAlEHP2/MtXM8ePYCT9yZZbROFFb1qnnW/bKnT35R7iwj9uzWA9tjqfGZF rUzYaksJbHAEVPgo5ADhi261cw9i2Yjag2LToC8QJBIMUToI+ruzZSSkafw5xUooJ6ow DTb2lotAcn56bOk6xVG0gUINA32kmrYJSgFIyYO/VNx2A8Ivk0KC2cC23QdDxe0s86ht Sh0v3wTYTyZ2z0muoqGjLFH1BPH6OoJL+pBgo7xyKgNE1gPsALPWHKUD3kKFqywKdj/E LBHw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FVxRTBSSpGWvsSIM56dCdMMOOoS0bTlkPeIWHxGwORhX2vNVlBkjNuN0NBt8A4Ax5OBK7aLAd7IwJJ4tA==
X-Received: by 10.50.15.131 with SMTP id x3mr16910761igc.18.1461648372135; Mon, 25 Apr 2016 22:26:12 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABkgnnXKDZvLWxkhFP0R4jW=ZyFwqiqQREFA5BFKH9i4PQCmyA@mail.gmail.com> <CAP8-Fq=Oi_kGebcRsyHYQdXWwLxFQxFwR=jeOyKS-+vW7eE=0w@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnX35n3K=cGTC2EvwG3=w6X7uWCikw+QFqhO7-RiLV8zJQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAP8-FqmcguLQaVxeNs1ROAG0XEBgYNtDiJ3+sYUcxmRrFfou1Q@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnUvimZ8z6XZBpKobjfp3R_WudV=ienXR-DH8B7Li98v0A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CABkgnnUvimZ8z6XZBpKobjfp3R_WudV=ienXR-DH8B7Li98v0A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 05:26:02 +0000
Message-ID: <CAP8-FqnSkmtpE3CaW10BoQkpd1E8Rt8T-sNB1avOBcsLhp_sdg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=14dae9340d9701fe5705315c88d6
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/webpush/EMXLHJOIR1ofImmnznKT7JcMX6M>
Cc: "webpush@ietf.org" <webpush@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Webpush] Receipt subscription follow-up
X-BeenThere: webpush@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of potential IETF work on a web push protocol <webpush.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/webpush>, <mailto:webpush-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/webpush/>
List-Post: <mailto:webpush@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:webpush-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/webpush>, <mailto:webpush-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 05:26:14 -0000

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 10:23 PM Martin Thomson <martin.thomson@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On 26 April 2016 at 15:18, Costin Manolache <costin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > You mean an AS having multiple instances would use a different
> > receipt set for each instance ?
>
> More likely one per data center/region.  An application "server" might
> want to ensure that receipts go to the DC that generated the push
> message.
>

The wording of the spec doesn't seem to ensure this.

I can see some benefits - but also costs :-)

Costin


>
> > That may be problematic for many
> > reasons - like load balancing, queuing, AS server restarts.
>
> Acknowledged.  Most of those just fall into the "stuff we deal with
> when writing software at scale" bucket though.
>

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email